"There is nothing inherent in a engine out scenario that causes the plane to roll on it's back."

You can't be serious. Are you a pilot?

Probably a pilot but not multi-engine rated.:*

I thank lomapaseo for his excellent screen capture work, it really makes it easy to discuss what happened.
I concur with the majority of posters on this thread. The fans on the starboard wing are not under power. Both props on the port wing are putting out a lot of power-you can tell from the exhaust trails diverging and from the rapid nose down yaw at the 90 degree roll point. There was no effort to chop power on the good side (no decrease in density of the smoke trail), so the guy flying was behind the aircraft mentally.
The proximate cause of the loss of control was a mis-handling of the loss of engine power on the starboard wing. The reasons for the dual engine loss of power on the starboard wing are unknown at present. It would be interesting to know when the engine failures occurred.
At least that is my personal opinion of the accident. Unfortunately, it is improbable that the accident will be fully investigated.
You may fire when ready Gridley:rolleyes::}.

Just wondering
 

At some ex-soviet era cargo planes the engines are with the FE, right?
A crew with no training, no CRM, in an unarworthy aircraft...

If I am wrong please let me know.

An-12 has no center console/power quadrant -- instead a passageway for the navigator to reach his station.

Set of throttles and trim wheel outboard of each pilot's seat.

what s the cause?
 

hi guys, I wanna ask your opinion about the causes of the crash..
I mean, I agree with you about the engines out, but ..why both engines on the same side??
it seems something more then a casuality, maybe also a human error in managing the emergency?
pls let me know what you think..
Matt

hi guys this accident is very sad i have seen the crew many times im based in pointe noire and i had landed about two before the antonov 12 there were 4 to 5 miles final rwy 17 when they tried to make to the sea because the engines right side both flamed out and they did not make it. i think they flamed out from fuel starvation no other reason two engines flame out at the same time. minimum fuel to brazaville and back to take more payload. even there take off is scary its get airborne at the very of end of the rwy and it barely climbs. very sad rest in peace

Brazzaville is listed as 10800 feet paved runway. Field elevation just over 1000 feet!

means 6 or 7 hours before the accident, unless it happened in a microsoft fs

Maybe he was saying that the antanov was the second aircraft landing after they've landed. Not time related but number of aircraft related.
Yes these guys do take the minimal fuel to do a trip. They overload totally and use all of the runways to get airborne. Scary to watch these rambo's operating..........

Anyone know where the AN-12 fuel pickup point is in the tanks?
Normally, fuel pickups permit consuming the last of the fuel while flying in a nose up (ie landing) attitude but not necessarily in a nose down attitude. Dropping the flaps at the upper end of the allowed airspeed range while light on fuel could conceivably un-port the fuel pickups at a very inconvenient time.

From memory, approaches are flown with the outboard engines at idle and power supplied by the inboards in order to maintain airflow over the elevators.

I can't think of any western type which needs to do this.

Actually, they don't always leave their base with minimum fuel. Have seen similair aircraft at remote Angolan airfields defueling into plastic cans and selling it to the locals to use in their Primus stoves - it's only paraffin after all! Then they call for priority on arrival back in Luanda.